25. As to the Belinis' suit for damages under TILA, see 15
U.S.C. § 1640, Washington Mutual
conceded that the plain language of the Federal Reserve's regulation
allowed such an action to be brought in federal court under section
1640 despite the Massachusetts exemption, see 12 C.F.R. §
226.29(b), and Washington Mutual
did not challenge this regulation. However,
Washington Mutual contended that
any action under section 1640 was time-barred, because the section
contained a one-year statute of limitations, see 15 U.S.C. §
1640(e), and suit was brought more than one year after the closing
of the loan, when the required disclosures were allegedly not
furnished to the Belinis. Since the only federal claim in the case
was time barred, Washington Mutual
argued, the court should dismiss the state law rescission and
damages claims. Finally, Washington
Mutual argued that the complaint should be dismissed as well for
a wholly independent reason: service was not made upon
Washington Mutual within 120 days
of the filing of the action, as required by Fed.R.Civ.P. 4(m).